Well, for instance there's the fact that they use the N word but other groups don't. There's also the fact that black culture is emulated a lot.
And people will use the race card if they get confronted with these things.

I see blacks call white people crazy or even subhuman for different reasons. How would those who say that like it if they were all called that?

Human beings are so often self-serving narcissists that will do anything that elevates or enriches themselves with power and wealth! Some will join whatever majority to achieve this - whether ethnicity, skin color, ruling elites, religious identification, or whatever they perceive will achieve their motives! That's just human nature 101, aided by the devil who loves division, hatred, and destruction! Go to blood-soaked Europe, where this often has played out, not per skin color, but religious affiliation or ethnic group / tribe. Scots vs. Irish vs. English, Catholics vs. Protestants, Royalists vs. anti-royalists, highly educated vs. poorly educated, ETC. Go to Africa - where so often it was black tribe vs. black tribe (think those white slave traders didn't have help of black tribes capitalizing on exporting for money their black rival's tribesmen? Often, it's elites vs. the powerless, rich vs. poor. Royalty vs. peasants. It's all the same stuff, just different actors of different backgrounds, cultures, skin colors, etc. How about when Irish in the U.S. were both unwelcome and considered scum? Guys from the good part of town vs. the "bad" side of the tracks. Hate the guys at the high school in the next town over.

What about native Americans - some conspired with the Europeans to dominate their enemy tribes. Other Indian tribes, before the Europeans arrived, constantly warred with adjacent enemy tribes - they kidnapped, tortured those of other tribes. Look at black people today - light skin is often particularly preferred, particularly by darker men. The tanned whites of the wealthy and leisure class deemed the sunburned farmers as ignorant "rednecks." The old rich look down upon the new rich. Billionaires scoff at mere millionaires. Lions vs. the hyenas - who hate the wild dogs! Of course, there's always the perennial favorite, political parties.

Point is, this is how evil humanity rolls - as people side with whatever power structure, individuals or groups suit their selfish desires. Got a problem with race - and race ONLY (as opposed to the bad actions and views of whatever a person's racial/cultural background - then you have a problem with GOD - who placed people in time, place, culture, tribe, etc. And so, you could fill in that blank, Does _________ privilege exist? WHATEVER ethnicity, race or group you place in that blank has always included individuals within it who have been both privileged and a big problem, somewhere in history. It's just that people ignorantly want to cherrypick whatever group or persons they want to fill that blank in with! It's also why God doesn't view one man any differently from any other one!

Privilege exists on the notion that it's acquired by birthright, race, wealth and social position. It's inherently not a bad thing because we can't choose to what advantage we are born. But we can have the sense of good character to recognise when it has been randomly allocated to us.
That boils down to humility.....not from guilt.
I am a middle class, white woman who has had substantially more opportunities than many others. I had the advantage of a private education and without the stigma of being labelled as anything but a visually accepted Australian. I am blonde and blue eyed so I've never had anyone question my background. Which is second generation born to immigrants.
I've been privileged to not ever have to justify my right to be part of Australian culture. It's never been questioned.

Does black privilege exist? No, not even remotely in the same way that we've had the good fortune.
Have you seen Obama...he is a black man. Perhaps with other sprinklings but he is a coloured man. Could you imagine if he had of passed himself and his family off as white? People would on both sides would have ridiculed him.
It never mattered to me, Australian, Finnish, my core identity doesn't change. That is different for someone of colour. The melanin in their skin identifies them in a way we cannot understand. As they are recognised by it from birth. It is part of their self image and their heritage as it should be.

A black man should be able to identify as such.....the mere ascertain as to whether that could be seen as privilege shows me how imbalanced the scales are. He was using his blackness to get the popular vote? He is black, and had every right to identify as such.

Being white ( I guess I am white even though I am Portuguese and not a WASP) and a male has allowed me the privilege of:
Working multiple jobs to get my degrees ( Shipping, receiving, general labour, worked in a slaughter house, anything I could get).
Struggling to pay bills and raise a family.
Going to university part-time and full-time depending on how much money I could save.
Working nights, any shift I could get.
Being called "pork n cheese", being told to work construction like "my kind" is good at...
I have, quite literally fought for the everyone to have equal opportunity and in my life time I have seen JUST THAT.
I have seen more women and visible minorities ( and they have to be visible or else they aren't a minority of course)in high paying jobs and universities ( more than men know) than ever before.
I have seen multi-millionaire minorities with everything they want and need, complaining they are oppressed.

I have seen REAL oppression, I served in Bosnia, enough said.

I have seen a black president be elected TWICE in a country where black people say they don't have the same opportunities because racism against them is systemic.

My patience and tolerance of hypocrisy and lack of common sense has been eroded.

"He was using his blackness to get the popular vote? He is black, and had every right to identify as such."

Anyone appealing to their skin color to make themselves more favored in whatever way? REALLY bad! Other than asserting that, being from whatever minority background, one understands the challenges of others with a similar background. But there's certainly nothing superior about one's skin color. Can you imagine a white person in America - or anywhere in the West, today, using their skin color to promote themselves in business or politics (OK, yeah, people still do, just mostly do it far more subtly) - they'd be besieged with universal outrage. Knowing some of the characters in MY family's history, if I took that attitude, I'd have to deny my own race . I never even think of my own race, unless someone else - usually a minority - makes it an issue. Which is sad.

Remember, we're ALL genetic "mutts." And we're the products of so many people we're the collective product of. Just 6 generations back, counting our parents, there are 124 people that we genetically came from - all of our parents, grandparents, G GPs, GG GPs, GGG GPs, and GGGG GPs helped make US possible. And so, just six generations back, EVERYONE has 64 GGGG GPs alone - and in that chain of people you descended from, if any one of them didn't exist, then YOU wouldn't either!

But genetics are not what people consider race - it's always skin color. And in my case, it's pale, Scots-Irish stuff that burns like a lobster with too much summer sun!

Melanie wrote:
Have you seen Obama...he is a black man. Perhaps with other sprinklings but he is a coloured man.

Other sprinklings? He's 50% negro, and 50% Caucasian.
Here's a picture of his biological parents.

Melanie wrote:
Could you imagine if he had of passed himself and his family off as white? People would on both sides would have ridiculed him.

Passed himself off as white? Technically, he's mulatto, passing himself off as "African American".
But why didn't he check the "Caucasian" box, in his census? Why was only the "African American" checked, when he is half Caucasian by ancestry? Was it because it was more beneficial to him, to come across as African American?

Melanie wrote:
A black man should be able to identify as such.....the mere ascertain as to whether that could be seen as privilege shows me how imbalanced the scales are. He was using his blackness to get the popular vote? He is black, and had every right to identify as such.

Again Mel, he's mulatto.

1 Corinthians 1:99 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."

Melanie wrote:
Have you seen Obama...he is a black man. Perhaps with other sprinklings but he is a coloured man.

Other sprinklings? He's 50% negro, and 50% Caucasian.
Here's a picture of his biological parents.

Melanie wrote:
Could you imagine if he had of passed himself and his family off as white? People would on both sides would have ridiculed him.

Passed himself off as white? Technically, he's mulatto, passing himself off as "African American".
But why didn't he check the "Caucasian" box, in his census? Why was only the "African American" checked, when he is half Caucasian by ancestry? Was it because it was more beneficial to him, to come across as African American?

Melanie wrote:
A black man should be able to identify as such.....the mere ascertain as to whether that could be seen as privilege shows me how imbalanced the scales are. He was using his blackness to get the popular vote? He is black, and had every right to identify as such.

Again Mel, he's mulatto.

I had to google what mulatto meant......what an ar+sehole term. It is derivitive of the same bullcrap we have here in terms of Indigenous Australians. Apparently whenever someone identifies as such then everyone becomes an expert in DNA genetics.
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others. I was 14 when I was walking with my best mate and a group of men took it upon themselves to say to me...."you shouldn't bring your tim tam friend along with you"...we were in a shopping mall. It was a direct reference to her mixed ancestry but she was clearly an Aboriginal girl, otherwise they wouldn't have commented. She was also 14.

There are multi hertitage people all over the place...myself, Phil as he mentioned also, but at no point would anyone ever question my tick on a consensus sheet. I'm white...nobody gives a hoot whether I tick Australian or dual Finnish citiizen which I am. Nobody cares.But I guess being Scandanvian makes me a little more white than most....apparently. Being Nordic and all. I would suggest that "you people" are the mulatto's of the Aryan ideal with your less than 'white' characteristics. Parading around with a false sense of white indentity. With your mongrel backgrounds and questionable heritage. When I really think about it and I see your mulatto pictures of dark skinned wog parents, and immigrant ancestry im not sure any of you have the same right I do as to claim yourself white. Lets face it.....I'm just a little more white.

How ridiculous that we could look at any person, regardless of colour and assume we know anything about how they identify. A personalised identification of their own self image that consists of such a myriad of experiences doesn't lend itself to a bigoted outsider that thinks he knows better.
A little more white than most? Or perhaps black only when it suits them?

The fact Obama recognised, identified or whatever to his heritage is not an excuse to call out his authenticity in making the claim. I'd be more concerned with the sincerity of anyone making an issue of it.

Melanie wrote:
Have you seen Obama...he is a black man. Perhaps with other sprinklings but he is a coloured man.

Other sprinklings? He's 50% negro, and 50% Caucasian.
Here's a picture of his biological parents.

Melanie wrote:
Could you imagine if he had of passed himself and his family off as white? People would on both sides would have ridiculed him.

Passed himself off as white? Technically, he's mulatto, passing himself off as "African American".
But why didn't he check the "Caucasian" box, in his census? Why was only the "African American" checked, when he is half Caucasian by ancestry? Was it because it was more beneficial to him, to come across as African American?

Melanie wrote:
A black man should be able to identify as such.....the mere ascertain as to whether that could be seen as privilege shows me how imbalanced the scales are. He was using his blackness to get the popular vote? He is black, and had every right to identify as such.

Again Mel, he's mulatto.

I had to google what mulatto meant......what an ar+sehole term. It is derivitive of the same bullcrap we have here in terms of Indigenous Australians. Apparently whenever someone identifies as such then everyone becomes an expert in DNA genetics.
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others. I was 14 when I was walking with my best mate and a group of men took it upon themselves to say to me...."you shouldn't bring your tim tam friend along with you"...we were in a shopping mall. It was a direct reference to her mixed ancestry but she was clearly an Aboriginal girl, otherwise they wouldn't have commented. She was also 14.

There are multi hertitage people all over the place...myself, Phil as he mentioned also, but at no point would anyone ever question my tick on a consensus sheet. I'm white...nobody gives a hoot whether I tick Australian or dual Finnish citiizen which I am. Nobody cares.But I guess being Scandanvian makes me a little more white than most....apparently. Being Nordic and all. I would suggest that "you people" are the mulatto's of the Aryan ideal with your less than 'white' characteristics. Parading around with a false sense of white indentity. With your mongrel backgrounds and questionable heritage. When I really think about it and I see your mulatto pictures of dark skinned wog parents, and immigrant ancestry im not sure any of you have the same right I do as to claim yourself white. Lets face it.....I'm just a little more white.

How ridiculous that we could look at any person, regardless of colour and assume we know anything about how they identify. A personalised identification of their own self image that consists of such a myriad of experiences doesn't lend itself to a bigoted outsider that thinks he knows better.
A little more white than most? Or perhaps black only when it suits them?

The fact Obama recognised, identified or whatever to his heritage is not an excuse to call out his authenticity in making the claim. I'd be more concerned with the sincerity of anyone making an issue of it.

mel wrote:
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others.

Before you start going all sjw on me, I never tried to dictate his racial identification. His racial identification comes from his parents. One who happens to be a dark skinned African, and the other, a Caucasian.

I'm simply putting forth the undisputed fact that Obama identified solely as African American on the 2000 census. And frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask if he did that because it was in his best interest, politically, and career wise.

And FYI, just because one wants to "identify" as something, that doesn't change facts.

Facts:
1)Obama's father was a dark skinned African
2) Obama's mother was a Caucasian.
3) Barack Obama is approximately 50% African, and 50% Caucasian.
4) Obama had the option on the census, to check any, or all of these choices: African American, Caucasian, other.
5) He checked only African American.

Do you really think it's beyond any sinful human being, to check a certain box, if he thinks it gives him the best advantage in his career?

I didn't think you were that naive.

And btw, calling me racist, does nothing but try to shut down communication. It's a ridiculous personal attack against me, and it doesn't belong in any conversation between two adults who are not racist. All the time you've known me here, and you'd still call me racist?

1 Corinthians 1:99 God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Audie wrote:
"Christianity is not a joke, but it has some very poor representatives."

Again, people hung up over a person's RACE - that's an attribute that God cast upon them - meaning, they have a problem with GOD. And I'd say people hung up on talking about race, whether referenced per individuals or collectively so, as opposed to the specific actions and words of specific individuals - then what - or rather WHO - they really have an issue with is GOD Himself! But when one asks the reverse question - I think that's rarely effective in refuting one so determined to use it. Because then it just turns into an evermore-hostile game of, "Oh, yeah, well what about so-and-so?"

People typically insert race into a statement or conversation because they either can't make their point or substantiate what they assert without appealing to it, and typically do so only to prejudice the conversation aimed at others who likewise tend to filter information and events through a racial lens.

Fact is, PRIVILEGE can be race-based, or wealth-based, politically based, regionally based, power based - or in any combination thereof. Again, people who want to always seem to want to inject a race-based context into their assertions - well, I almost always suspect that they themselves have a huge problem with whatever race, and that they appeal to that type of argument, mostly, to appeal and connect with those who likewise have this same problem: They'll bring out their racial filter because it's often so useful and effective in achieving one's means or in leveraging its perceived power (which often works) over the attitudes of others.

mel wrote:
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others.

Before you start going all sjw on me, I never tried to dictate his racial identification. His racial identification comes from his parents. One who happens to be a dark skinned African, and the other, a Caucasian.

I'm simply putting forth the undisputed fact that Obama identified solely as African American on the 2000 census. And frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask if he did that because it was in his best interest, politically, and career wise.

And FYI, just because one wants to "identify" as something, that doesn't change facts.

Facts:
1)Obama's father was a dark skinned African
2) Obama's mother was a Caucasian.
3) Barack Obama is approximately 50% African, and 50% Caucasian.
4) Obama had the option on the census, to check any, or all of these choices: African American, Caucasian, other.
5) He checked only African American.

Do you really think it's beyond any sinful human being, to check a certain box, if he thinks it gives him the best advantage in his career?

I didn't think you were that naive.

And btw, calling me racist, does nothing but try to shut down communication. It's a ridiculous personal attack against me, and it doesn't belong in any conversation between two adults who are not racist. All the time you've known me here, and you'd still call me racist?

mel wrote:
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others.

Before you start going all sjw on me, I never tried to dictate his racial identification. His racial identification comes from his parents. One who happens to be a dark skinned African, and the other, a Caucasian.

I'm simply putting forth the undisputed fact that Obama identified solely as African American on the 2000 census. And frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask if he did that because it was in his best interest, politically, and career wise.

And FYI, just because one wants to "identify" as something, that doesn't change facts.

Facts:
1)Obama's father was a dark skinned African
2) Obama's mother was a Caucasian.
3) Barack Obama is approximately 50% African, and 50% Caucasian.
4) Obama had the option on the census, to check any, or all of these choices: African American, Caucasian, other.
5) He checked only African American.

Do you really think it's beyond any sinful human being, to check a certain box, if he thinks it gives him the best advantage in his career?

I didn't think you were that naive.

And btw, calling me racist, does nothing but try to shut down communication. It's a ridiculous personal attack against me, and it doesn't belong in any conversation between two adults who are not racist. All the time you've known me here, and you'd still call me racist?

mel wrote:
It is racism to its core......white men thinking they can dictate the racial indentification of others.

Before you start going all sjw on me, I never tried to dictate his racial identification. His racial identification comes from his parents. One who happens to be a dark skinned African, and the other, a Caucasian.

I'm simply putting forth the undisputed fact that Obama identified solely as African American on the 2000 census. And frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask if he did that because it was in his best interest, politically, and career wise.

And FYI, just because one wants to "identify" as something, that doesn't change facts.

Facts:
1)Obama's father was a dark skinned African
2) Obama's mother was a Caucasian.
3) Barack Obama is approximately 50% African, and 50% Caucasian.
4) Obama had the option on the census, to check any, or all of these choices: African American, Caucasian, other.
5) He checked only African American.

Do you really think it's beyond any sinful human being, to check a certain box, if he thinks it gives him the best advantage in his career?

I didn't think you were that naive.

And btw, calling me racist, does nothing but try to shut down communication. It's a ridiculous personal attack against me, and it doesn't belong in any conversation between two adults who are not racist. All the time you've known me here, and you'd still call me racist?

Rick, in all honesty no I don’t think you’re a racist. After reading my post back just now, it was rather scathing and I apologise. I do think though that you have brought into problematic racial attitudes, which on the surface are very casual forms but have a very underlining racist theme.
I don’t think it’s intentional and I don’t think it’s with malice but it is in some ways even more damaging. In that when moderate, good people can’t see how their attitudes are racist in certain areas then it underpins a bigger societal issue. We view racism through our lens.....how it looks and feels to a white person without ever considering how that might look through the lens of a black person.

“His racial identification comes from his parents.”

I think you’ve misunderstood the premise of “identification”. Ethnic and racial identity is all about how people develop and experience a sense of belonging to their culture.
I’m not sure how anyone apart from the individual could even begin to know what that would look like.
What brings about identity is not only how they see themselves but how others view them. I know that sounds counterintuitive to what I’ve said but it really isn’t.

Every interaction we have with others from birth starts to shape our identity. We see where we fit in the world shaped around how others perceive us.
For a dark skinned person, since childhood, the colour of their skin has been an instrumental part of their identity shaping. If we’re talking about naiviety then it would be a very niave person to think a black person has not experienced racism. Through a child, adolescent and adults eyes it is a direct attack on their person based on their appearance.
Those making those attacks are not seeing the level of skin colour based on DNA as DNA is an interesting thing and half Caucasians can look as dark as any of their full ‘brothers and sisters’.
So in actual life experience which shapes identify they learn very early they are viewed and catogorised by many, by no means all based purely on the colour of their skin.

Then the same system and society that has been at play in shaping their identity....as a black man in this case, then has the audacity to then also dictate how they must then identify themselves when ticking a freakin’ box. We’ve raised you in a culture where your ‘place’ has been dictated by your colour to then turn around and say we also have the right to determine how you racially identify. It’s just plain hypcrocisy. But yet the ascertain is there that Obama or anyone in that same position was the one being disingenuous.